Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Thus, the Authorized Representative's explanation for reduced N.P. being due to only reduced turnover cannot be accepted as in 2009-10 on Shri Ramesh Kumar Gupta, Jaipur Vs DCIT, Jaipur similar turnover the N.P. was 2.30%. Further, the expenditure has increased even when the turnover has decreased. The Authorized Representative's submissions that expenditure remains fixed is not in order when the turnover reduces to half, the expenditure is bound to decrease and the same is evident as in A.Y. 2009-10 the N.P. rate is 2.32%. The increase in sales commission and freight and cartage has not been explained satisfactorily while in the case of sales commission a general reply has been given that commission bearing sales have increased, freight and cartage is claimed to be reimbursed in which case it should not affect the profit. In view of the discussion as above, the rejection of books and estimation of NP at previous year percentage is upheld."